As sine die approaches, many bills are still realistically on the table.

The State Council of the Oregon Progressive Party (OPP) wishes to express its support for or opposition to a few bills, listed below.  The reasons for the OPP positions are explained below.

SUPPORTED BILLS

The State Council of the Oregon Progressive Party supports these bills:
 
SB 695A: Banning Baby Bottles and Drinking Cups for Children Containing Chemical Clearly Linked to Cancer, Diabetes, Autism, and Other Problems (in House Energy, Environment and Water Committee)

SB 695 would ban the production or sale in Oregon of baby bottles or children's drinking cups containing the chemical Bisphenol A (known as "BPA"), which has been linked to infertility, cancers, and prostate problems. According to Consumers Report, more than 200 scientific studies that show clear links between BPA exposure and increased risk of cancer, diabetes, and reproductive, neurological, and developmental disorders. Studies also show that BPA is in the bloodstreams of more than 90 percent of the population at levels that have shown harm in animal studies. Children appear particularly vulnerable to BPA, which has also been linked to early puberty, breast cancer, childhood obesity, autism, and hyperactivity.

Similar bans of BPA are in place throughout Europe, in China, and in the states of Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Washington.
HB 3446: Requires that Members of the Legislature to Face Some Competition When Seeking Other Jobs in Oregon Government (in Senate Rules Committee)

Under current law, moving from the Legislature to a full-time state government job can provide a huge financial bonus. HB 3446 requires that, for one year after ceasing to be a member of the Legislative Assembly, a former member shall not obtain a position as a public official in state government, unless:
  1. recruitment for the position is advertised to the public continuously for not less than two weeks;
  2. the minimum qualifications for the position do not require prior service as a member of the Legislative Assembly; and
  3. at least three applicants or the number of applicants who meet the minimum qualifications for the position, whichever is less, are considered for the position.
These requirements do not apply to any elected office, judgeship, or position that requires Senate confirmation. Former legislators will still be able to get other state jobs under HB 3446, but the process will be somewhat more transparent.
SB 742A: Allows In-State Tuition for Non-Citizens Who Have Been in Oregon Schools for 3 Years (in House Rules Committee)

Currently, an Oregon resident high school student who is not (1) a U.S. citizen or (2) the child of a U.S. citizen must pay out-of-state tuition at Oregon's public universities and colleges. The difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition at the University of Oregon is about $17,000 per year; at Oregon State University is about $13,000 per year. SB 742A grants in-state tuition to qualified students who have attended school in the U.S. for at least the prior 5 years and in Oregon for at least the prior 3 years; have graduated from an Oregon high school; and have filed an affidavit showing intention to become a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the U.S.
HB 3517:  Joins Oregon to the National Popular Vote Plan for Electing the President of the United States (in House Rules Committee)

If states with a total of least 270 electoral votes for President agree that their electoral votes shall be cast for the winner of the national popular vote, then the "Electoral College" system will be rendered moot; the national popular vote will decide who wins the Presidency.  Candidates will need to campaign throughout the U.S., not just in "swing states" such as Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.  The "National Popular Vote Interstate Compact" has been agreed to by 8 states, including Washington.  HB 3517 would be Oregon's agreement to join the Compact.
SB 40:  Removes State Income Tax Deduction for Contributions to Charities that Spend Less than 30% of their Budgets on Actual Charitable Services (In House Revenue Committee)

Some tax-exempt charities spend most of their money on fundraising or perks for administrators, not on actually providing charitable services (such as education, assistance to families or veterans, and the like).  SB 40 would require charities to spend not less than 30% of their budget on actual services, not fundraising or overhead.  Charities that do not comply would have to disclose in their marketing materials that contributions to them are not deductible for state income tax purposes.
HB 2894-3 Requires Disclosure of Major Funders in Campaign Ads about Candidates (in House Rules Committee)

HB 2894-3 would require that any large purchase of campaign ads (TV, radio, mailings, etc.) exceeding $2,000 identify the person or entity who paid for the ads. A political committee paying for ads would have to disclose the top 3 contributors to that committee during the current 2-year election cycle. This would not apply to items that do not reasonably have room for the disclosures, such as lawn signs. In 2001, the Oregon Legislature repealed the law that required campaign ads to identify who was responsible for them.


OPPOSED BILLS

The State Council of the Oregon Progressive Party opposes these bills (and opposes stuffing their content into other bills):
 
HB 2259: Increases Delay for Reporting Most Contributions Near Elections from 7 Days to 14 Days (in House Rules Committee)

Current law requires all candidates and political committees days to report, within 7 days of receipt, each campaign contribution received within the 6 weeks prior to the election. HB 2259 would increase tdhat to 14 days, with the exception of individual contributions exceeding $5,000 each (which must be reported within 48 hours). This would allow anyone (or any corporation or union or other entity) to make an unlimited series of $4,999 contributions during the last 13 days, with no disclosure of those contributions until after election day. This would be another giant loophole in the campaign finance reporting system.
SB 270A: Limits Aggregate Fines for Failure to Report Political Contributions to $5,000 Per Month (in House Rules Committee)

SB 270A would allow any person or entity to opt out of political campaign finance reporting by paying a fine limited to $5,000 for each calendar month during which the reporting requirements are ignored. This would apply to candidate campaigns, ballot measure committees, chief petitioner committees, and those making "independent expenditures," such as corporations and unions. Currently, the maximum fine is 10% of the amount of the unreported amount, once it is discovered.

SB 270A would open a huge loophole in political campaign finance reporting. Campaigns for Governor, for example, often receive contributions or make expenditures of over $2 million per month. In 2010, the Republican candidate received 12 individual contributions of $100,000 or more and spent $10.5 million on the race. The Democratic candidates received 6 such contributions while spending over $7.6 million. SB 270A would allow any campaign to simply not report any of its contributions or expenditures for an entire month and instead become liable for a single fine of $5,000.
HJR 7A: Granting New Powers to Governor and Legislature, Upon Governor's Declaration of a "Catastrophic Disaster" (in Senate Rules Committee)

HJR 7A asks voters to revise the Oregon Constitution to grant stunning new powers to the Governor and Legislature, upon declaration by the Governor of a "catastrophic disaster." HJR 7A establishes no numerical standards defining such a disaster--an event that "results in extraordinary levels of death, injury, property damage or disruption of daily life in this state" and "severely affects the population, infrastructure, environment, economy or government functioning of this state." It is defined to include an "act of terrorism," even though it is difficult to conceive of such an act that would result in "extraordinary levels of death," etc.

The declaration allows the Governor to spend State money however she wishes, "regardless of the legislatively expressed purpose of the allocation." It also allows the Legislature to enact laws and spend money with only "a majority of the members of each house who are able to attend a session." There is no indication of who decides whether a member is "able to attend." It allows the Legislature to disregard many provisions of the Oregon Constitution, specifically authorizing the Legislature to:
  1. rescind the right of voters to call referenda on bills involving taxation;
  2. disregard the limit on spending gas taxes only for roads;
  3. cancel kicker refunds;
  4. impose mandates on local governments without reimbursement; and
  5. reallocate lottery proceeds for any purpose.
Upon ending the disaster period, the Legislature can "include any provisions the Legislative Assembly considers necessary to provide an orderly transition to compliance with the requirements of this Constitution that have been overridden under this Article because of the Governor's declaration of a catastrophic disaster." This effectively nullifies the Oregon Constitution, as it authorizes "any provisions the Legislative Assembly considers necessary."

HJR 7A also allows the Legislature to meet in places other than Salem and to conduct business with less than a quorum of two-thirds of all members. But the existing Oregon Constitution already allows the Governor to call the Legislature into special session at any time, without a geographic limit on where the session meets.

Japan just suffered the type of "catastrophic disaster" most likely to hit Oregon--a magnitude 8.9 or greater subduction zone earthquake. Japan did not invoke emergency laws to allow the Prime Minister to spend government money as he wished. And in a disaster, Oregon will not be alone. Oregon will still be part of the United States, and significant decisions will be made by the United States Government.
HB 2492: Removing Uncontested Democratic Party and Republican Party "Precinct Committeeperson" Races from the Ballot (in House Rules Committee)

The major parties (Democratic and Republican) have in Oregon more than 17,000 positions for "Precinct Committeeperson," each elected on the primary election ballot from a very small district. In 2008, over 99.85% of these positions were not contested (one person running, or none). All 17,000 races appeared on the ballot, even when no one ran. Removing the uncontested races from the ballot would save $224,000 per election cycle.

Taxpayers subsidize the partisan primary elections of the Republican and Democratic parties, including the costs for electing these "Precinct Committeepersons" who do party work under the control of the parties. The Independent Party of Oregon must pay for its own primary election.
HJR 44A: Putting on the Statewide Ballot a Measure to Modify Some Old-Style Language in the Oregon Constitution (in Senate Rules Committee)

HJR 44A would ask voters to change some words in the Oregon Constitution: 
  1. referring to the legislative, judicial, and executive as the "branches" of the government instead of the "departments";
  2. changing one instance each of "he", "him", and "his" to "the Secretary of State";
  3. correcting one spelling error.
Testimony on this bill was that it would have no substantive effect. Obviously, there is no urgent need to change these words, which should wait until the Legislature is ready to refer a generic "clean-up the Constitution" bill that could make dozens of similar wording changes. For example, the Oregon Constitution contains 20 instances of "he" and 9 instances of "him" and 45 instances of "his", as well as 3 references to "man" and 2 references to "men". Should Oregonians pay the cost of statewide ballot measures for changing just 3 of these 79 instances of genderism?
 
The ballot should present voters with substantial issues, not with a insubstantial wording changes.